Don't be swayed by HP figures....Torque is what really counts.
05-02-14, 11:28 PM
#91
Lead Lap
Schauberger works on the principle of a twister or whirlpool and is thus an implosion engine as opposed to the explosion (compressor) engines we know. Except for the electric motor which is not an independant engine, all the engines we know depend on fire (combustion) and as Ernst Heinkel (who had a jet aircraft up in the air in 1939) said, are basically compressors, the Schauberger however not. Schauberger's patents were bought out by American companies under severe secrecy clauses. One can imagine the chaos it would cause if an engine appears on the market that replaces a trillion dollar industry.
The Schauberger engine has tremendous torque, although speed variation might be a problem.
Not that we are disloyal to our beloved thunder wagons, but it's time to cast our eyes to new horisons. Had a look at that car last year that Karl Benz built in 1886, in the Mercedes museum in Stuttgart and it is amasing what he did to get the torque of his internal combustion engine, multiplied. Irony is that we haven't progressed as far as we think since that contraption, we actually just refined it. Let's hope our great grand children can say otherwise.
The Schauberger engine has tremendous torque, although speed variation might be a problem.
Not that we are disloyal to our beloved thunder wagons, but it's time to cast our eyes to new horisons. Had a look at that car last year that Karl Benz built in 1886, in the Mercedes museum in Stuttgart and it is amasing what he did to get the torque of his internal combustion engine, multiplied. Irony is that we haven't progressed as far as we think since that contraption, we actually just refined it. Let's hope our great grand children can say otherwise.
Last edited by nipponbird; 05-03-14 at 12:09 AM.
05-03-14, 04:47 AM
#92
Super Moderator
I've been on that hill, and the trucks there really struggle, even with all their torque. However, I think the drivers are far more concerned with their brakes when it comes to steep grades like that - if the compressor is not keeping up and air brakes lose pressure, it can be a disaster.
If you lose ALL air pressure to a wheel, that wheel will lock up, because there is nothing restraining the springs. Still not the best condition to be in (skidding can still cause a loss of control), but not the runaway semi we've all been lead to believe occurs when the bad guy cuts the air hoses.
05-03-14, 08:55 AM
#93
Lexus Champion
Originally Posted by mmarshall
Depends on the driving conditions. Most American drivers (and the majority of those reading this thread will probably be Americans) tend to prefer throttle response at low RPMs, as opposed to many Europeans, who tend to wind out their powerplants more into the peak-HP range. Throttle response at low RPM is generally more of a torque function than HP.
Also, another related question:
Look at the tachometer of the new Bentley Mulsanne
How come the tachometer only indicates a maximum of 5,000 RPM..........when this car is not even a diesel? (in fact, it's a 6.3 liter twin-turbo V8 engine that runs of unleaded fuel)
05-03-14, 09:34 AM
#94
Lead Lap
Hmm.......is there any reason why this is the case?
Also, another related question:
Look at the tachometer of the new Bentley Mulsanne
How come the tachometer only indicates a maximum of 5,000 RPM..........when this car is not even a diesel? (in fact, it's a 6.3 liter twin-turbo V8 engine that runs of unleaded fuel)
Also, another related question:
Look at the tachometer of the new Bentley Mulsanne
How come the tachometer only indicates a maximum of 5,000 RPM..........when this car is not even a diesel? (in fact, it's a 6.3 liter twin-turbo V8 engine that runs of unleaded fuel)
Last edited by nipponbird; 05-03-14 at 09:42 AM.
05-03-14, 11:47 AM
#95
Hmm.......is there any reason why this is the case?
Also, another related question:
Look at the tachometer of the new Bentley Mulsanne
How come the tachometer only indicates a maximum of 5,000 RPM..........when this car is not even a diesel? (in fact, it's a 6.3 liter twin-turbo V8 engine that runs of unleaded fuel)
Also, another related question:
Look at the tachometer of the new Bentley Mulsanne
How come the tachometer only indicates a maximum of 5,000 RPM..........when this car is not even a diesel? (in fact, it's a 6.3 liter twin-turbo V8 engine that runs of unleaded fuel)
05-03-14, 01:05 PM
#96
Lexus Fanatic
Thread Starter
The average European driver (or driver in any other county, for that matter), doesn't drive a Bentley or Rolls. I agree with Och....comfort and sound-isolation is probably an issue. That, combined with the fact that the enormous torque in the average Bentley/Rolls engine doesn't need RPMs, even if the average European is used to having them.
See my reply just above.
Also, another related question:
Look at the tachometer of the new Bentley Mulsanne. How come the tachometer only indicates a maximum of 5,000 RPM..........when this car is not even a diesel? (in fact, it's a 6.3 liter twin-turbo V8 engine that runs of unleaded fuel)
Look at the tachometer of the new Bentley Mulsanne. How come the tachometer only indicates a maximum of 5,000 RPM..........when this car is not even a diesel? (in fact, it's a 6.3 liter twin-turbo V8 engine that runs of unleaded fuel)
Last edited by mmarshall; 05-03-14 at 03:11 PM.
05-03-14, 02:57 PM
#97
The 6.3L V8 is 787.5 cc per cylinder, which is a very large capacity per cylinder.
A 2.0L in-line four is only 500 cc per cylinder.
787.5 cc per cylinder is the equivalent of a 3.15 liter four cylinder! A big four cylinder.
Thus the reciprocating mass becomes very heavy, such that it is not willing to rev as much as smaller capacity engines.
Furthermore, the large capacity per cylinder has less surface area to volume ratio, such that the ratio between the surface area for the valves is relatively smaller, hence less high speed breathing, resulting in a lower red line.
Here, probably the greatest factor for a 4,500 rpm red line is possibly the turbo.
Because turbos work over a very narrow rpm band.
They have probably designed the turbo to kick in at low revs for instant response, and not much of a flat spot down low, but the price to pay is that the turbo quickly runs out of breath at the top end, hence the lower red line...
A 2.0L in-line four is only 500 cc per cylinder.
787.5 cc per cylinder is the equivalent of a 3.15 liter four cylinder! A big four cylinder.
Thus the reciprocating mass becomes very heavy, such that it is not willing to rev as much as smaller capacity engines.
Furthermore, the large capacity per cylinder has less surface area to volume ratio, such that the ratio between the surface area for the valves is relatively smaller, hence less high speed breathing, resulting in a lower red line.
Here, probably the greatest factor for a 4,500 rpm red line is possibly the turbo.
Because turbos work over a very narrow rpm band.
They have probably designed the turbo to kick in at low revs for instant response, and not much of a flat spot down low, but the price to pay is that the turbo quickly runs out of breath at the top end, hence the lower red line...
05-04-14, 04:10 AM
#98
Lexus Champion
The 6.3L V8 is 787.5 cc per cylinder, which is a very large capacity per cylinder.
A 2.0L in-line four is only 500 cc per cylinder.
787.5 cc per cylinder is the equivalent of a 3.15 liter four cylinder! A big four cylinder.
Thus the reciprocating mass becomes very heavy, such that it is not willing to rev as much as smaller capacity engines.
Furthermore, the large capacity per cylinder has less surface area to volume ratio, such that the ratio between the surface area for the valves is relatively smaller, hence less high speed breathing, resulting in a lower red line.
Here, probably the greatest factor for a 4,500 rpm red line is possibly the turbo.
Because turbos work over a very narrow rpm band.
They have probably designed the turbo to kick in at low revs for instant response, and not much of a flat spot down low, but the price to pay is that the turbo quickly runs out of breath at the top end, hence the lower red line...
A 2.0L in-line four is only 500 cc per cylinder.
787.5 cc per cylinder is the equivalent of a 3.15 liter four cylinder! A big four cylinder.
Thus the reciprocating mass becomes very heavy, such that it is not willing to rev as much as smaller capacity engines.
Furthermore, the large capacity per cylinder has less surface area to volume ratio, such that the ratio between the surface area for the valves is relatively smaller, hence less high speed breathing, resulting in a lower red line.
Here, probably the greatest factor for a 4,500 rpm red line is possibly the turbo.
Because turbos work over a very narrow rpm band.
They have probably designed the turbo to kick in at low revs for instant response, and not much of a flat spot down low, but the price to pay is that the turbo quickly runs out of breath at the top end, hence the lower red line...
Initially though, I wondered then as to how GM was able escape this (since they employ 6.0-63 liter V8 engines). Plus, that SRT Viper has an 8.4 liter V10 engine.
But yeah, I think this is where your post regarding turbochargers comes into play.
And now I understand especially when looking at the torque figures for the Mulsanne.
Mulsanne 2010– 6,752 cc (412.0 cu in) V8 twin turbo 512 PS (377 kW; 505 hp)@4200, 1,020 N·m (752 lb·ft)@1750 RPM
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
